The Sun. — London, England, 1808-07-28 00:00:00

about four minutes, and then returned to the house, and told her felloW-servants. .' 'Wm. Woodburne had been ten yearS in the ,ser e %dee of Mr. Gregson, and was latterly hip footman. 'Went out to the Garden at the time spoken of the last witness, and, , after 'waiting some minutes, he saw the Defendant quit that spot by himself, and he immediately went away. The Defencfant never Continued his visits so late, ;te e the time when Mr.' Gregson returned, except ,once. ;The Witness sus petting that there were Some imprupel - doings, left the gate open, in order that Mr. Gregson .:might come in without giving any notice. The Defendant, howeVer, contrived to get away some or way other, Without his master seeing him. He had himself Seen the Delendahi kiss his Mistress three different times , at lease. He had taken one or two notess - from her to the Defendant's house -in Broa&street. He bad geee into the "room unexpectedly, and saw the - Defendant and his mistress Sitting - on the sofa close to each Miss Matilda PhippS, a ycliifei lady only 14 . years ofage, deposed, that on ehfe ° l tO2 'Of March, 1804, • being then only ten years of age, lend a Visit to ' Mrs. Gregson, at her house in' the Coefirry. When the Defendant, came,' she an • her J ister were sent into the garden, but afterwards, in passing. byohe . study-window, she i the Defendant kiss Mrs. Gregson. It appeared to her very improper,_ and she mentioned it to her mother When she went home. Oae-Meredith, soh° hadbeen-at the house in the ountry, Mahe absence of the - footman, was desired by one of the maids to get a hut:born to light the. Defendant home. It was a dark' night, and when he was in the hall he saw Mrs. Gregson and the De fendant' come down stairs together. bad been • before proved, that in the upper part of the house there were no rooms for the reception of company, but only bed-chambers, and . a small dressing-room of Mrs. Greg - son." Some other servants of the Plaintiff corroborated the statement of the abate Wooclroff, aeotherservant of the Plaintiff, Spoke as to the transhetioneit 'the tpwrr-house, She Corroborated the orcount.cf the visits, and tha blind being let down. She has - 'seen them sitting very cicise' to each other on tvaW arm-Chairs. She re- Membered one day in the beginning Of tile present yeat; that,- during one of these visits, she beard a of the Moving of chairs e which continued for a longtime. She was herself a married woman,and had no doubt that a criminal a& had been committed at that time. The kitchen in which she then was, was separated from the parlour by so thin a partition, that • every noise could be distinEtly heard. Her mistress used, instead of ringing, to tap at the partition when the wanted any thing. ' - 'V hen Mr. M'Taggart Came out, he tv: nt into flie ) -kitchen, and began to speak to ip.,e for a few nfflitifesa and Mrs. Gregson then eanaeont ; and the 'witness endeavoured to look , a. them, as s-he bad the strongest suspicions, but they both fixed their eyes so fulliapon - herohat she could not look at them. Her mistress immediately went up stairs. She went into the rborn;:and saw the chairs placed in a different part of the room, and very close . to each other.' On her cross-examination shesaid, that there was a loose cover over the sore, which was not discoma posed. Although she had the strongest iuspicions Of a a criminal connedion having then taken place, she did not 'mention it at the time, as she did not thiek . that one circumstance was enough to take away her mistress charaater. A few witnesses being called to confirm different parts of this statement, the case of the Plaintiff was - closed. ' Mr: DALLAS then made. a very able speech on the part of the Defendant. He said •he should have hardly a word to address ,the' Jury ore the subjeet of damages, for that upon Wee be meant th rely - was, that the Defendant hedThnt, a true' plea on the record when he said 'he Was not guilty of the , crime . imputed to hirai; :He trusted that after the Jury had heard the oblseliations 'which it was his duty to address to them, tliyhwould be of opinion that the crime of adultery had- not been proved ; and he, in his conscientious opinion, believed that it had not been committed between these parties. He did not mean to say that paying frequent and Icing visits to a - married woman •in the absence of her husband was in itself a proper thing.. He did not mean to deny that personal familiarities, such as kissing her, as had been sworn, was a censurable action ; but a great deal more must be' proved before 'any thing like adultery could be establish ed. As tO the visits in. the :ipresebt instance, it was evident that if the Defendant visited Mrs. Greg eon at ail at the countraedrouse e it Must have been in the absence of-her husband: It had been proved that her husband was in ahe•habit of going. to town at eight in the morning, and •not returning till nine or ten o'clock at night.- It could not then be sup posed that any one, would , come to pay visit; before eight in the morning, or after ten - at -night.e-- kisaing her (which •had been sworn to) was, ,perhaps, a.censurable familiarity; but when it was • recollected what sort of a woman Mrs. Gregson was now proved to be, if was not easy to ascertain to what . dhgree he-might have been provoked to this familiari ty. As to tie blinds of, the drawing-room being down, it had been confessed by one of the witnesses, on her cross-examination, that the slay shone- strong _on thg. room, and the blinds were generally down the. Treater part of the.day. His visits.had usually taken place about six ca'cluck, when- the blinds were ttatur.ily down, as the son atilt shone on the loom. As for 'all that was. alleged to have passed in the, ceuetry hcuse, lie never"'heardsecharge of 'adultery attempted to be madeout On SLICh Si ightcircuthstances. It. had not appeared_ that the doors were ever fasten ed ; servents had come in 'Unrest , them without no tice, and never:saw them in any indecent situation. Once they were seen sitting together on a sofa, and another time on; two artn-chairs, but neither time e eeas there any thing like incleceicy in their situation. • It was t proye(lAlat Mrs. Gregs sal. dressed herself a little eiure when she expeCied a visitor, and that she * was not quite so cleanly in her person .when she ex &echo be alone. There were, however,ho &coin stances from which adultery could be Mferred. The lreflttettcy of his visits migld•Perhaps be accounted for on another principle. Hayieg lost his own wife, his hOthe had lost its .brincip retraelion, and he - might 'ienoCently seek, 'in the eonversation of alio thler woin t in, theae,nlea.sures which be had been' formerly accustomed to in dornestic fife . . Ns to - the walk in 'the shrubbery, although the parties might be out of the view of the servants for a short !hue, bethought it. by no means-followed, that any thing criminal had taken-place on that occasion. It was a little extraordinary, that those Servant maids . who were. so attentive •to 'One part of the trans aAion, should not- have also ob,erved when their mistress returned, whether her. dress was so discom posed, or whether it bore 'any of those marks which might have been expected from such a scene, as they had supposed at such a place, and under such cir cumstances. in fad, nohe cf those strong. cir cumstances were.-broughtforward upon this occasion which were always brought forward in every similar case, when it was attempted to establish the fa& of adultery from circumstances;' and yet when it was recollected the Plaintiff . was an emitftnt Solicitor, and that almost all the witnesses were his own ser, van t s,it could not be supposed that there was a single circumstance omitted which could, bypossinility, have helped out the case. The fads sworn to at the town-house were Of the same description. No doors were ever fastened, and the parties, were never found in indecent situations. As to what one of the witnesses _swore to having hea?d from the kitchen, it was. the most improbable story he ever heard in his - life. Could it be supposed that any woman who knew that the mem that she vas' in was sepa rated from the kitchen by so slight a partition that every noise could be• ditindly heard, and who herself used to rap at that partition when she want ed her servants, should ro far expose herself to them as had been described by the. witnesses ? When Mrs. Gregson came out the witness bad not observed any disorder, in her dress. When she went up stairs, and the witness entered the parlour, she found the sofa not disordered, and the only "suspicious circumstance she could find was the two arm-chairs close together. The _Learned - Counsel dWelt at some length on . theitnprobability of this story, or of the aEtual commission of the crime which had been charged against his Client. He felt so strongly that his Client was entitled to a verdict, that he did not know how to say any thing in mitigation of damages, which would appear. as if he gave up the strength of his case. If he' were to speak, - however, about damages, he would .beg the Jury to consider what sort of a woman this was, for whom the bus . - band carne a second time into a Court of Justice to demand reparation in damages for the loss til l her society. The first, verdict gave hitn a right 'to be divorced from .this" bad. woman, and a verdict now , ccyld *give him nothing but pecuniaiy damages. He might mention that this was a woman who had been married a long tithe without, having any children, who was proved tobe given to drinking, and whom the Defendant might have visited at first from the most innocent 'motives, being a near neighbour, and having_ himself lately lost his wife, whose conversa tion gave, his home a plea Sure while she lived, thk he was now obliged to s e ek e l se - Where. _ _ Lord ELLETIBOROUGH recapitulated the whole of the evidence, and made several observations as he proceeded. As to the personal familiarity which the Defendant had been at different times seen to use, in kissing Mrs. Gregson, that circurnstance.was princi pally important as giving a charther to the sort of intimacy which subsisted between them. It was extraordinary that when he usually continued his vi sits so late as nine, he should never have staid to see the husband, with whom he waSOn terms of friend ihip, and, who usually returned a little after nine. It was a circumstance worthy of observation, that when he was even walking in the shrubbery with her, and paying so great attention' to her at one time, he' should return froin the place he brought her to, alone and without continuing those attentions. As to the observation made by the Learned Counsel-for the Defendant, of the improbability Of a, woman exposing 'herself to be overheard by her maid in the kitchen, when she knew that every noise must be heard, it must be . recolle&ed that at this time she had prosti tuted herself to the embraces of a coachrnan, and had probably lost all regard to decency, or a ll other cobsiderationa, and that caution which a woman in other circumstances Might be sup Posed to feel. In cases of this nature, howeVer, Juries would not determine, on slight circumstances, that the crime of adultery had been committed; but if the circumstances appeared to them so strong and preg nant, that they could have no reasonable doubt in their minds but that the fa& was committed, it would be their • duty to, say so in their verdict, and to award such reasonable damages as the nature of the czise required. , . _ The Jury retired .for more than two hours ; on their return; they found for the Plaintitr—Damages One. Shilling. COURT OF CONIMON PLEAS; futy 27. MALICIOUS ARREST. WILSON V. TUItNeR. Setjeant cooraLL for the PI intiff, =stated, that this was an aaion to recover dama ges f or a 'a groundless and malicious arrest.. His client had. been a very respetiable apothecary and surgeon at Yoxford, in Suffolk, but had fallen into' difficulties in consequence Ofsuffering himself to be persuaded to engage in some commercial speculations with,a person whom he would not then name (Johnson the smuggler). The Defendant, Turner, had,, in February 1806, arrestedlim for 72 11. and,kept him in, prison for a twelvemonth, where he was almost starved, having nothing to live upon but the prison allowance. The Plaintiff knew nothing of Turner; had never seen_ him in Ws life, nor ever bad any transactions with him. His client had tised the legal means of forcing the Defendant to come into Court and prove, his demand, if he had any, but Turner had not. appeared, and his client had been discharged upon a superscdeas. _ _ Mari. Gordon, the*Deputy Filazer for the City of London, swore to his taking the affidavit of the De fendant for 7211. to arrest,the Plaintiff, in ,F,ebruary, 1806. Some other witnesses prove the taking out the capias upon this, and its execution.. John Teague, the .Keeper of the Giltspur-street Compter, proved the confinement of Wilson upon an arrest by Johnson, the smuggler, and upon a de tainer by the Defendant for 7211. He stated that the attorney .for Turner and lohnton, and Mr. Joseph Hill, of Rood-lane,, had somettnizs called. and said, that Wilson might be discharged upon mutual re :eases between himself-and Johnson. . • 1 1 ;nac,( - 1 by kieviA su) 1-1 arst rs .01 . No. 4, Iktaittert-CAUrt. D ow -street; - "k 1 ; 1 - , - 51 -:-Q;f7.:ot No. 112 Straild l where Advhiisentents, Orders Mr. Barker proved the hand writing of Turner 4o the:atlidavit, and' described him as-a Qaptain in the East London .and - as Jiving at ITOxford like a man of fOrtnne. • He knew Wilson, who - had been highly respeeted at the place, and had heard Of - Lis bein g engaged in other transaCtions' besides his business of Surgeon and Apothecary, but was not aware of what nature these we're. Mr, Pearson, the Attorney, who had been con, cerned for -Mr. Wilsim in the Supersedeas, proved the circumstances as Stated by the 'counsel. He had known Mr. Wilson long, and had heard of his having been engaged in Commercial . speculations. Being asked by Mr. Serjeant Sit Ern Eta), whether , he knew One.Hainilton, he said, he did not, but 'Alp , posed the Learned Serjeant alluded to the van who had been conneeted with, Sir Home Pophaiii. • Mr. Serjeant SHEPHERD, for the Refendant, stated, that the Plaintiff had been engaged in smug, Ong tranSaCtiOns with Johnson, the smnggler- 7 that in their joint capacity they had obtained a . quan= tity of bark from Messrs. Sharpe and Kirk, drug.: gists,. to 'supply our artily in Holland, in I 70,--that a bill of exchange had been giVen to the druggists for. this bark—that they had arrested >Johnson upon it—that .Turner had become bail for John Son, and . had been obliged to pay—and that he consequently conceived that he had a right to sue:Wilson, as- the partner of Johnson. There was, tberefetye,' proba ble ground for the arrest, and his Client would be entitled in a verdkt. • . Mr. Thomas Johnson was the principal witness for' the Defendant. He stated, that the Plaintiff and himself had been partners, but that there - was -no regular deed of partneship, as this was not customary _among smugglers: He proved tti hand-writing Arf the Plaintiff in a letter, ‘khere thelatter deplored the distress and anxiety of mind to which Ake had been subje6ted, and expressed his resolution to dissolve the partnership. The witness at than time wen(by' the name of Hamilton. \tie and Wilson had been concerned together in supplying different things, to our army in Holland; and the' bark in question amongst the rest. He then deposed to the circiun stances of his - ownarrest, as stated by the Learned Counsel. On his cross - examination, .he admitted, .that he had heard of the intention of ,Wilson to Sue him for three thousand, pounds and that he and Turner had conferred Cogetlier a day or two,before arresting the PHutir, and had emplOyed the same Attorney: Mr. Kirk, the .druggist, :;tated, that he and his partners had supplied Wilson -with the .bark in question, to the amonnt of 3361. for Which they re ceived a bill on Johnson, I,Vhorri they arrested, and afterwards his bail: Their Attorney provedlisltrv ing received 4981. ps'the w hole amount of the . debt and Oats.' Mr. Serjeant Cocrui.t. contended that there was no probable ground inlateVer for the arrest.; `that Turner had never had any t,hing to4o with Wilson, having only become bail for 'Johnson, from - whose representation he , had 16rnt.alt- he kneW about the Plaintiff.. This was evidently „a conspiracy between Johnson and Turner to force Wilson to release his claims against the former. It was, s besides, mani fest perjury on 'the part of Turner, who had sworn to a debt of 7211. whereas ; even upOit the pretence which had been set up, it was only 4981. Chief Just ice MANSFIELD assented to the preposi tion, that there was no probable ground for the ar rest, and that fhere was some evidence even of a malicious conspiracy. The question of 6mages . he left to the Jury. The Jury, after consulting together a fel. , minutes, found for the Plaintiff--Damages fOO . Ol. There is artother aaiori depending by the sante Plaintiff against Johnson. DUBLIN, JULY 21. COURT OF KING's BENCH, iut.Y tg. THE aDVERNORS AND COMPANY OF THE RANK OF IRELAND, V. HENRY . MALONE. Mr. GREENE opened the pleadings, by saying, in substance, this was an a&ion to recover from the Defendant,. who was a Clerk in the Bank of Ireland, the amount of his bond . for the due performance of. his duty, in the situation be filled, having for. felted tire sum by which he was bound, through a series of mal-practices; and absconding from the ser vice of his employers. .To this the D e f en d an t put in two pleas,•the one, non est faethm, or that he did -not pass the alledged bond, and the other, if he did, that he was at nonage at the time of perfe&ing -Both issues - were joined. , The SOLICITOR-GENERAL stated briefly a few leading circumstances, which referred to a forme' transaction, on which the Defendant was crimin a lly prosecuted. The Defendant had the good.fortune to have been acquitted on that. trial, or, at least, through the clemency of - the laws, to have escaped capital punishment.. But. as the Governors'of the Bunk of Ireland did not, through that acquittal, -feel themselves recompenced for' the alledged de falcation in their funds, and the presumed embez - zle.ment of near 54001. by the Defendant, while in, their service,. and .a precipitant elopement in con sequence, Without any attempt - to account for his conduCt, they, in. justice to themselves, and to hold out salutary example, in the way of civil. punish meat, to the . community, but particularly to the numerous confidential persons whom they must of necessity employ, were induced to bring this ac tion to recover-the penalty by which the Defendant .had' bound himself to act with the stritest inte-, grity in the department allotted to .him, and with unqualified attention to the interest of , his employ-' ers. However, he. thought proper to put in th 6 plea of •minority against the ordinary proceeding to, enforce the penaly in his .bond, or that he was, in the language of the law, an . infaht under the ago of 21 years, when he executed-the bond, if exe cuted at all. The SOLICITOR delicately said, that hevould not trespass on the ti m e o f th e Court, by animadvert ing .on the nature of the tndral principle ,which guided the Defendant . in this uncommon species of defence. True it was, that his clients, from the recommendations of the young inan at entering their service, and '2 securities, with which they, at that period, con ceive d t h ey h ad sufficient reason to satisfied, were not scrupulously exad about in quiring ling his age, and therefdre the proof of that an d pub ished by WI LLI rot' the Poly, I titters AM ARM fOr th e PRICE 01 YESTA 13ank Stock y navy S. per Cent. 93 krish 5 per Cent. 4 per Cent. 85 84 3 - per Cent. 1\ ed. 61..? 3 per :2ent. Con. 67 i3ank4... Ann. 19 a !GER SCRIPPS, South Molten street, Grosvenor-square ; Editor, 6CCi (POSi;Paid) m us t be a dd res sed. HIGH. WATER AT ,LONDON BRIDGE TO-N4ol•' ROW.. Morning, 53 min. a ft er S. j A f ternoon, r 9 !fill. aftr- -;•."' circurnstance, on•which he restad'hirdefance, which is, whether or not lte was an infant or an adult :It • the time of executing the bond', mast almost eitio sively d6Petid on the nature of the evidence to bead:* data7ed baathe, kindred, or th - os'e collateral proofs - with. which a he,*leratorid)he Deleirdaot affeded to hava baen well pre,pareal a which certainly, whether siroq oar weak, -a(ni.it`ter entbelv-tor 'the consideration fit the Jury - aasT'fkr regfirded fads, were evi , aence: adiniib a .rae lf retained within the 'cilia limits which aa the law prescribes. Theliond Was proved by the subscribing w itaesS, Who was not acquainted generally with the hand - writing of the Deiendant a btit saw him, howeiret-,eitea -cute the bond in the year 1802, whichain con..enl plation of law, left liitn an infant of the age of 1 4 years at that period. • Mr. HENRY DEANE GRADY, in the defence, .., stated, !that his c l ient, a_ young man of considerable talents, and unquestionable fidelity to his employers, its the 'erdid of the Jury cleitrly illustrated under that suhlinte and irrevocable principle of our laws, which says, that . hOwever feasible the allegation, against a culprit—however capririons, or ohioasi,)f \veil toundad, the Mode•adopted io prosecute him might - possibly be, on acquittal by his P e ers,' a Jury Of his country,, he becomes restored to that-community as innocent as any otter man 111, •t he co,mmunity - , - against whom no charge has e ver been . preferred. ThnS circumstanced was btu Client at this moment, yet coerced ,by the civil laik of the Country, as if the allegatiOns against MO had been prot•ed, add iinputed • crimes biazoneal with all - the aggravating exaggeralion and hyper- ; . bolical display ,of profesiiibnal 'declamation, which the convided crimes of the in s ist abandoned mis creant could alone sustain.: Mud) as-he respe&ted the Learned Solicitor, highly Convinced as he was of that superior delicacy of mind which tanglyi him intuitively to treat lightly on the prematuni, -vidims of itnputed guilt, anal to deal eharitablt` at the crisis of life and death with those'. stand' ing before.the . awfyl Tribunal of Justice, still b 6 must say, however supported the. Leaned Gentle' man - might possibly be. Under the instruelious b 6 received, yet as no prof had appeared of hi s Client no taint .could possibly attach to" .tin;: in point of laonoor or morality, by seeking refuge under the merciful!rawS \vita it was not proved he had vio hued ; and ia order to rescue himself frem.infaroy , he fixes. his firm foot upon a fad, that of infancy': when the suppbsed bond s'as executed, a' fad, Of which the best possible evidences wo'ild be aclduct ; si such as the anxious , testimony of the fond mathe t •who bore him, with substantial collateral evidcnce by her neighbours, and a very - 1-arung iestitnuaii-1 by an exemplary Clergyman, tincia:t wham• he ra,:aa.a:" a moral and pious talue,ation. • I\lal'Orte's mother; a widow, and resident of tP town'of r.iiritai, proved that he was born in the ye 1784—that he was ten . years old when his father died--a , slie has other children; One a married datgr'" ter ; she:produced - a school medal in the year I 79' which did credit to 'the boy's capacity, f r „ at tho Rev. Mr. Robinson—it also mentioned his age,' 3 ' did two other medals in the hands of Mr. Jalirch cock, an Ag ent. . A Mrs. Catherine Smith corroborated the rest!' moray of Malone's mother. . , Aftermaay.ingenious attempts by the Pla;ntbr Counsel to discredit these witnesses, and,prove. efr . of \ the medals, at least aj a forgery; 'prayer-book: record of Malone's birtl.l4,bit2l7Tti'silbt:::- t s and sister's, they gave up the contest, ufbiclk if persevered in, Mr. Robinson, the o Clergym' who educated' Malone,. was - present, to aupport. --- Verdiat for'ahe Defendant, with casts. SPOIZTIAG LVTELLIGENCE. . SALISI3UR.Y.-RACES. TUESDAY, JULY 26. • His Majesty's_ Plate of to-Is. . Mr. Codaird's Mountaineer, 6 yrs bid Egreinont's Brother to Healey, 4 yrs old - Mr. Day's ch. c. Buckler, 4 yrs old - - 3 dr , . • • A Sweepstakes of togs. each. Mi. Tievanion's Bujeptiaks,.6 . yrs'old - 1 4 Mr. J. Hawkins's brt c.,Rosano, 4 yrs old - Thirtecn.Capital Prizes to lye drawn of 20,00 01; .0 5 0001., .5,0001. 2,0,001. 5 . 901. and a full pro pat' tion of other Prizes. Next Tuesday, August 2, l ? the Day. Tickets - and'Sll4res, warranted unchavvoi `are selling: at all the Lottety Offices. -, • BIRI ---- • -•-• on the 24th inst. .at the Government-House, Plymouth' the Hon. Mrs. C. Paget, of,,a Daughter. Lately, at Ossington, the 'Lady of john Est' M. . of a Daughter.. • A, few days- agog at Sir.. Hercules Langrishe's, Stepheil f ! Green, Dublin, - ;he Lady.of the Rev. Dean Langrishe, .of Daughter. ' Lately, in Merriodevquare, Dublin,'the Countess o f Meatill of a Daughter, . Lately, in Frederick-street, Dublin, the Lady of Georf Brown, Esq. of a Daughter. MARRIED. • .. • • On Saturday last, in Dublin, Ilardingc CifEtrd, EA* Fitzwilliam-street s to Miss Harriet Pennell, second dough' ter of Lovell Pennell, Esq: of Itagot- - street. On Thursday the 14-4 i. inst. 'at the Parish Church o lSr i Pancras, Warwick Calipady Richards on , E sq. .youog e " , son of John . Richardson, Esq. of 13ride,e to Marianne, only daughter of lames Walker,' Esq. of c' d .' way-street, Fitzroy-square. Lately, at Loftus-hill, the .seat of john f.• Henry, john Nuttall, Esq. nephew to General Freeman, to no,, thea; second daughter of Daniel Faikiner, Esq. late of .4d bat's-town, :n the County of Dublin. _____-~ DIAD On .Monday last, aged '7O, the Rev'. Richard Wadchogt cM ' M. A. Redor of Cavendish, in Suffolk. • On Tuesday . , at his hou3e' in .!sl - tv Cavendish-streat, tits infant daugfilet - of H.' Hariord, E'sq On the ad inst. aged 64, and 38th of his Ministry ) -,) Rev. Robert Arnot, D. D. Ali n i ste r o f Kingsoarns, YrOt of Qivinity,i St. Mary's College, and Re!tor of the Un i " sity of St. Andrew's. STOCKS R DAY. ~~ . India Stock, India Bonds, ss, 6s. pr. Exchequer ss , 7s. P" Ornnium, If it ' Imperial 3 per Cc,lt. 6 7 A I Ditto Ann.. , AQ 69' Cons: tor 2 5 th Aug v.., h tx i Cei, pa '4lg J. .S o Pri lc c ; Whc v u „C;re,, I ~~ ~' 1 I I ' tit PC 3St tr• 11,,1 : At} ;11 . ba, T th e; Sand lit;f' i sell c Cre brew 4-104 plr / 1 )4 p liar! ! Ci4ct A Uti rig %he ti o , 4 Ur, 414 -20 •,,‘ 11l to leelit Thirl A' s t hk: al Zivtz